Petitioners, who are accused Nos.1 and 2 in C.C. No.11848/2014 which proceedings are pending on the file of the XLV Additional City Civil & Sessions Judge, Bengaluru, are before this Court for quashing of the said proceedings.

2. First petitioner herein married the 2nd respondent-complainant on 18.10.2010. On account of certain disputes having arisen between them, second respondent-wife lodged a complaint before Hulimavu Police alleging that at the time of her marriage her parents had given an amount of Rs.10,00,000/- and gold jewelry to the petitioners and second petitioner, mother-in–law had harassed the complainant with a demand for additional dowry and they continued to harass her. She has further alleged that first petitioner was in the habit of consuming alcohol and harassing the complainant under intoxication. She has further alleged that she was made to carry out all the household chores at the instance of a lady by name Ms.Radha and first petitioner used assault the complainant. She has further stated that on account of the parents of the complainant not being able to comply with the demand for additional dowry of Rs.5,00,000/, she was thrown out of matrimonial house and inspite of all efforts made by friends and relatives, to patch up the differences, it did not yield any positive result.

3. I have heard the arguments of Smt.Chandini, learned counsel appearing on behalf of Sri.Suresh Kumar, advocate for the petitioner and learned HCGP appearing for the State. Though, second respondent is represented by Sri. N Ramakrishna Reddy, learned counsel, none have appeared.

4. It is the contention of Smt. Chandini, learned counsel for the petitioner that dispute between first petitioner and second respondent herein was a matrimonial dispute and all the allegations made by her in her complaint lodged before the jurisdictional police is false and she contends that the complainant herself had filed a petition for dissolution of marriage by filing a petition under Section 13(1)(ia) and (ib) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, in M.C.No.660/2017, which came to be referred to Mediation Centre and a settlement was arrived at between the parties, which was also accepted by the Family Court, Bengaluru and there has been dissolution of the marriage by grant of a decree of divorce on 22.11.2017 and as such, continuation of proceedings against petitioners will be an abuse of process of law and petitioners are now being made to undergo ordeal trial despite second respondent-complainant having agreed in the settlement agreement filed before the Family Court that she would be withdrawing her complaint, she had refused to do so. Hence, she seeks for allowing the petition and prays for quashing of the proceedings pending in C.C.No.11848/2014.

5. Having heard the learned Counsel appearing for petitioners and learned HCGP appearing for the State, it would emerge from the records that there is no dispute to the fact that first petitioner and second respondent herein were husband and wife and second respondent herein had filed a petition for dissolution of the marriage solemnized on 18.10.2010 between herself and first petitioner by filing a petition under Section 13(1)(ia) & (ib) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 in M.C.No.660/2017, which proceeding was pending before the Prl. Judge, Family Court, Bengaluru. In the said proceedings, matter came to be referred to Mediation and with the assistance of the mediator, parties entered into a Memorandum of settlement, which came to be reduced into writing and an agreement was drawn under Section 89 of CPC read with Rules 24 and 25 of the Karnataka Civil Procedure (Mediation Rules), 2005, which is at Annexure-E. A perusal of the same would indicate that both parties have entered into a settlement as per the terms set out thereunder and one such term of settlement entered into between the parties which relates to the present proceedings or which has bearing on the present petitions is found in clause 7 of sa